Editorial: The South Pasadena Welcomes Feedback [email protected]
In a stunning turn of events, tonight’s Special Joint Meeting of the South Pasadena City Council and Planning Commission is expected to reveal that key housing data used to justify Measure SP in November 2024 was wrong — potentially upending the entire foundation upon which voters approved a major change to city zoning and building height restrictions.
At the heart of tonight’s special session (6:00 PM at City Hall Wed. 3/26) is an admission buried in the staff packet: the city’s RHNA (Regional Housing Needs Assessment) calculations were flawed, leading to an overestimation of how much new housing South Pasadena needed to zone for. This error — now being labeled a “miscalculation” — was central to the narrative that scared the public into passing Measure SP, a controversial ballot measure that repealed the 45-foot building height cap voters had protected since 1983.
“During the City’s effort to gain compliance in a compressed timeline, calculation errors were made in the site capacity analysis… This resulted in an overage of sites included in the upzoning and, consequently, the City now has an excess of site capacity for housing development.”
— Official City Staff Report, March 26, 2025
Now, with Measure SP passed — and the power to raise height limits firmly in the hands of City Council, not the voters — staff are moving quickly to “correct” the RHNA numbers and adjust building height and zoning codes accordingly, under their seeming context of the City needing to comply with state law.
But for many residents, this isn’t just a planning update — it’s a breach of public trust.
Were Voters Misled? Were the RHNA Numbers Inflated Before ‘Measure SP’ Vote?
In the run-up to the November 2024 election, City officials repeatedly warned that failure to pass Measure SP would jeopardize South Pasadena’s ability to comply with state housing mandates. The messaging from the “Yes on SP” campaign was unequivocal: unless the City could build higher in select areas, the entire town might face dense development, even in single-family neighborhoods – and there is no time to make systemic changes to the plans.
That message now appears to many to have been built on purposefully misguided unit numbers required.
The official report for tonight’s meeting reveals that the city inflated its housing needs, and now has a “surplus” of housing capacity beyond what RHNA requires. The over-calculation occurred when preparing the state-mandated Housing Element — which drove the urgency behind ‘Measure SP’. The miscalculation was not disclosed publicly before the vote back in November 2024. Instead, residents were warned of catastrophic consequences if they didn’t vote “yes.”
“South Pasadena is a mostly built-out city… Despite a thorough database search, the City was unable to identify a sufficient inventory of suitable sites. Instead… [we] upzoned beyond the level required.”
— Staff Report, p. 4–5
City staff and consultants now admit that this over-upzoning went well beyond RHNA targets — a fact many believe was deliberately manipulated and not disclosed until after the election.
Tonight’s Meeting: Correction or Cover-Up or Both?
Tonight’s meeting is being framed by the City as a routine “study session” to refine zoning and development standards. But the implications are far from routine.
The Council is expected to discuss:
-
New building height limits well above 45 feet in many areas, including Mission Street, Fair Oaks Avenue, Huntington Drive, and the Ostrich Farm corridor.
-
Zoning changes that lower density in certain spots, now that the RHNA overcount has been “discovered.” CLICK HERE to view SB8 (it’s complicated)
-
Adjustments to setbacks, open space, stepbacks, and design requirements — all aimed at making tall, dense development more “feasible.”
But the centerpiece of the discussion is clear to most residents: how to justify the lifting of height limits that were sold to the public under questionable data.
Now that the housing requirement numbers have been corrected back to what ‘No on SP’ proponents were claiming, it’s clear the city could have met its RHNA goals without lifting the 45-foot height limit — which is the crux of the controversy surrounding Measure SP.
Staff now describe these changes as a “right-sizing” of density and height — but critics say it’s really about locking in the post-‘Measure SP’ development framework before more residents catch on.
From 45 to 85 Feet? Height Limit Increases Already in Motion
The passing of ‘Measure SP’ eliminated a long-standing requirement that voters approve any increase to the 45-foot building height limit. Now with ‘Measure SP’ in place, it hands all the decision power to the City Staff & Council to make those changes unilaterally.
It worth noting that, either directly or indirectly, certain South Pasadena City Council Member(s) may need to recuse themselves from the dais during tonights meeting due to conflicts of interest related to real estate and development dealings.
Tonight’s meeting includes proposed new limits such as:
-
Mission Street: Up to 51 feet base height; up to 61 feet with density bonuses.
-
Fair Oaks Avenue: Up to 65–85 feet with bonuses — that’s 6 to 7 stories.
-
Ostrich Farm & Huntington Dr.: Up to 75 feet with bonuses.
These changes are no longer hypothetical. City consultants — The Arroyo Group — are presenting visual massing studies, development maps, and policy recommendations that show exactly how high and how dense the future of South Pasadena could become.
Who Knew What — and When?
Councilmember Jon Primuth, a highly influential proponent of ‘Measure SP’, is coming under renewed scrutiny. Not only did he personally fund pro-SP campaign efforts, it is likely that he also helped craft the messaging that downplayed height increases while pushing the urgency of RHNA compliance.
Critics now argue that Mr. Primuth and others on the Council at the time were aware the RHNA numbers were inflated, yet continued to push Measure SP with fear-based appeals to protect the city from state intervention. That fear — now proven unfounded — helped swing the yes-on-SP vote.
“’Yes on SP’ soft-power players weaponized state housing law messaging to terrify voters into giving up their control,” said a local South Pasadena Resident who regrets voting ‘yes on SP’. “And now, magically, the RHNA numbers were wrong. We should repeal [measure] SP.”
Some have requested an independent investigation from the California State Bar Association regarding Councilmember’s Jon Primuth’s involvement during the ‘Measure SP’ campaigning: As-well-as Primuth’s total recusal from future zoning or development decisions involving South Pasadena real estate parcels whatsoever – including CalTrans homes purchases/sales.
What Happens Now?
City staff’s perspective seems to be that the proposed adjustments tonight will still keep the City in compliance with HCD (Housing and Community Development), while better aligning with South Pasadena’s character.
That well could be true. But for many residents, compliance is no excuse for deception at this scale, if ever.
If the RHNA numbers were knowingly exaggerated to gain voter approval for Measure SP, the integrity and competence of the operations at City Hall itself is now totally in question.
Tonight’s meeting could be the first step in restoring transparency — or confirming the worst fears of a torn community that was manipulated.
Attend In-Person, Interact Live on Zoom, or Watch Live Tonight
Date: Wednesday, March 26, 2025
Time: 6:00 PM
Location: City Hall Council Chambers
Address: 1424 Mission Street, South Pasadena, CA 91030
Live Broadcast Links:
-
Livestream: CLICK HERE for City Live Stream Page
-
Live ZOOM Online – You Can Public Comment Live: CLICK HERE for City ZOOM
Public Comment: Up to 3 minutes per speaker. Arrive early or log in before the meeting begins to participate.
Community Momentum Builds
This is no longer a routine housing update – and the question now is: Will the people of South Pasadena demand transparency and proper elected representation as promised?
Some Background on the ‘Measure SP’ ramp-up:
Op-Ed: NO on Measure SP – Keep Your Right to Vote on Development in South Pasadena
